I grew up with "The Lone Ranger" TV series starring Clayton Moore and Jay Silverheels. I just saw the hour long origin episode (1949). Here's a quick outline: Jack Reid is a Texas Ranger. He and several other Rangers are ambushed in a lonely canyon by the Cavendish Gang. All the Rangers except Reid are slain. Reid has been seriously wounded and left for dead, but he is still alive when an Indian named Tonto finds him hours after the ambush. Tonto nurses Reid back to health by a shady pool in the canyon. Reid decides to become a masked frontier crime fighter called "The Lone Ranger" with Tonto riding at his side.

The origin episode caused me to wonder if The Lone Ranger and Tonto were gay. (Now please, don't get all feisty because I said "gay." Some people are gay and that's life in the real world.)

Anyway, Reid apparently didn't have a love life per se when he rode into the canyon with his comrades and was shot: he recovered and rode out of the canyon as The Lone Ranger with nary a glance over his shoulder at his former life and whatever (or whoever) it may have held.

A flashback incident suggested to me the seeds of love were planted early between Reid and Tonto: Reid (as a youth) found Tonto barely alive after Tonto's people had been slaughtered in a tribal war. Reid carefully and tenderly nursed Tonto back to health; Tonto never forgot Reid's kindness.

After the Cavendish ambush, Reid became The Lone Ranger with Tonto as his constant and almost worshipful companion. Neither of the men had any female consorts (girlfriends, wives) in the series as far as I recollect. The two men spent their time in each other's company 24/7 and this is why I wonder if they were gay. Both men were virile, manly, and rugged; they lived intense outdoor lives; they enjoyed a very close friendship; surely they needed some sort of intimate physical contact in their daily lives.

Does anyone have any thoughts, opinions, information, insights? This is a serious question; I am writing an article for future publication. My time is precious (and your time is precious as well) so please don't write simply to bash gay men, make crude jokes, or to state your religious beliefs. Thanks!

ORIGINAL POST: Do you remember the popular 1950s TV series starring Clayton Moore and Jay Silverheels called "The Lone Ranger"? I just saw the hour long "origin of" episode (1949). Here's a quick outline of that episode:

Jack Reid is a Texas Ranger. He and several other Rangers are ambushed in a canyon by the Cavendish Gang. All the Rangers except Reid are slain. Reid is wounded and left for dead, but he is still alive when an Indian named Tonto finds him hours after the ambush. Tonto nurses Reid back to health in the canyon. Back on his feet, Reid becomes a masked crime fighter on the frontier called The Lone Ranger. The faithful Tonto rides at his side.

The "origin of" episode caused me to wonder if The Lone Ranger and Tonto were gay. Reid apparently didn't have a love life per se when he rode into the canyon with his comrades and was shot: he left the canyon after several days of recuperation as The Lone Ranger - with nary a glance over his shoulder at his past life as Jack Reid, Texas Ranger and whatever (or whoever) may have been a part of that past life.

A flashback incident suggested to me the seeds of man to man love were planted early between Reid and Tonto: Reid (as a youth) found Tonto near death after Tonto's people had been slaughtered in a tribal war. Reid tenderly nursed Tonto back to health; Tonto placed a ring upon Reid's finger when they parted. Tonto found the ring on a cord around Reid's neck when he discovered him wounded in the canyon and it was thus that Tonto identified the man he had known so many years before. (The incident of the ring speaks volumes to me because the ring is the traditional symbol of complete love in western culture - of complete and enduring spiritual, emotional, and physical love.)

After the Cavendish ambush, Reid became The Lone Ranger with Tonto as his worshipful companion. The two men were together 24/7 riding the rangelands fighting crime. Neither of the men had any female consorts (girlfriends, wives, prostitutes) in the "origin of" episode or in the series as far as I recollect. Both men were virile, manly, and rugged; they lived intense outdoor lives; they enjoyed a very close friendship that many would admire and envy. Their relationship was certainly homosocial and possibly homoerotic as well. But surely such vital, dynamic men needed some sort of intimate physical contact in their daily lives and their relationship was not simply homosocial and/or homoerotic in the final analysis. I suggest their relationship was homosexual. I suggest they "went all the way."

Does anyone have any thoughts, opinions, information, insights? This is a serious question; I am writing an article for future publication. My time is precious (and your time is precious as well) so please don't write simply to bash gay men, make crude jokes, or to state your religious beliefs. Thanks!

CONCLUSIONS: Some have suggested that unless the author/creator suggests a character is gay we cannot assume a character is gay. But what we cannot assume is that because the writer did NOT specifically state that the character(s) were gay that they were positively, unquestionably, irrevocably straight.

We routinely make educated guesses about Shakespeare's characters without asking the poet to so state that a particular character is straight, gay, or bisexual. We make inferences, educated guesses from the accumulation of evidence presented by the poet. That's all we can do. Some wonder if Iago in "Othello" is gay and cite certain passages in the play. Others have suggested that Antonio in "Twelfth Night" is gay and cite particular passages. Shakespeare did not specifically state that either character was gay but readers today weigh the accumulated evidence in the play to make some educated guesses about the sexuality of both characters. I have done so in my assessment of the TV series "The Lone Ranger." I admit readily that my interpretation stated here of "The Lone Ranger" is based on what I perceive to be the evidence of gay sexuality in the "origin of" episode of "The Lone Ranger."

Neither The Lone Ranger nor Tonto appear to have any interest in females. And there's the rub; there's what leads one to wonder about their sexualities. We cannot assume that they are straight. Somemight say that because they don't appear to have any specific gay mannerisms or sterotypical characteristics, we perhaps cannot assume that they are gay either. So they don't march in a gay pride parade or hang out in a gay campground ... that isn't enough evidence to assume they are straight. We may wonder if they may be more or less asexual - that is, they have no physical interest in either males or females, they have no adult sexuality. Perhaps they have pre-pubertal, undeveloped sexualities. But it is too hard to believe that these two vital, dynamic adult men have pre-pubertal, undeveloped sexualities. The desire for sexual contact makes us human. We must believe these two men desire some sort of physical contact with another human being that satisfies certain natural, basic, animal, primitive needs and urges. Otherwise the characters are absurd.

We should keep in mind that The Lone Ranger and Tonto spent 24/7 in each other's company with little inclination to do otherwise. This speaks volumes to me. Neither seemed to have any interest in women, in settling down or in becoming family men. What sort of message do you suppose their preferences for bachelorhood and rootlessness sends to the viewers? How can we believe a man is heterosexual if he prefers to spend his life on horseback traveling from place to place, doesn't seek the company of women, and sleeps under the stars with another man?

Look carefully at Tonto and his place in the scheme of things in the "origin of" episode. Tonto is firmly cast in the "female" role. He is passive; he does not initiate action. He unquestioningly supports The Lone Ranger's decisions, obligingly runs errands, and dutifully nurses the wounded. He is routinely put down by "real" men with epithets like Injun or redskin - just as "real" men traditionally put down and control women with epithets like babe or girl, and put down and control young men with epithets like boy.

The Lone Ranger however takes the "male" role; he initiates action, he gives orders, he makes decisions, he takes the hard work upon himself. There is a subtle message here about the relationship between the two men - about their male and female roles - and their passive and active sexual roles in their relationship.

If indeed a homosexual relationship existed between the Lone Ranger and Tonto (and I contend that we are to believe that such a relationship did indeed exist) then that relationship could not be explicitly stated or played out on the screen of 1950s TV. In my estimation, the two main characters were quietly defined for the knowing viewers as male and female, man and wife - and this sort of relationship was exactly how American society perceived homosexuals during the early fifties. It was believed then that one partner in a homosexual relationship consistently took the female role and the other partner the male role - that one partner was "the penetrated" and one partner was "the penetrator." I contend that beliefs about homosexual relationships current in the early fifties colored and were the foundation of the relationship between The Lone Ranger and Tonto in the TV series.

HISTORICAL NOTE: The Lone Ranger and Tonto lived in a time and place that quietly condoned and encouraged physical relationships of an intimate nature between men.

Situational homosexuality was practiced in the old West simply because females were few and far between. For ranch hands and cowboys, the nearest females (aside from the rancher's wife and daughters who were strictly off limits) could be as much as 50 miles away from their place of employment. The old West was the world of wide open spaces. Much too much space for the average ranch hand or the cowboy to ride into town every night for female companionship. Ranch hands and cowboys were often too young, too financially strapped, too adventurous, and too uneducated to have girlfriends or wives. So how do you think cowboys and ranch hands satisfied their physical urges and sexual needs? If you answered "with each other" you are correct.

It's a well known fact that trail bosses encouraged their hands to pair off with one another at the beginning of long, womenless cattle drives for the sole purpose of satisfying their natural physical desires and needs.

Additionally, men of the old West were not hampered in their physical expression for one another or in satisfying their physical desires by the strictures of an omnipotent socio-religious establishment. Religion only marginally existed on the frontier and the lusting men of the West simply scoffed at any attempts from the establishment to control their physical desires or activities.

Such was the historical milieu from whence came The Lone Ranger and Tonto. In my final assessment, there was little reason for the Lone Ranger and Tonto to deny their physical needs or desires for one another - in light of the fact that the fulfillment of such desires was not rigorously suppressed in the old West but rather quietly condoned, encouraged, understood, and accepted. The old West was quietly gay-friendly; homosexuality was OK as long as it didn't frighten the horses. The Lone Ranger and Tonto were gay and their loving, mutually consenting, enduring and ennobling relationship was the hallmark of the show. We can believe both men were better for knowing and loving the other.

You posted this in 4 different forums :eek:

who honestly gives a **** if the lone ranger is gay. he's a TV character and i'm sure he wasn't. back then nobody ever would have thought of that like they do now.

who honestly gives a **** if the lone ranger is gay. he's a TV character and i'm sure he wasn't. back then nobody ever would have thought of that like they do now.

Yeah I agree.

who honestly gives a **** if the lone ranger is gay. he's a TV character and i'm sure he wasn't. back then nobody ever would have thought of that like they do now.

My question was meant to be taken seriously and if taking my question seriously and giving it a thoughtful answer is something you cannot do, you're not required to respond. There are many gay and lesbian people viewing the boards at Sitcoms Online. Gay and lesbians have just as much right to view and enjoy Sitcoms Online as anyone else. And they have the right to view and enjoy the boards without being harassed about their orientations. Please keep your impatience, dismissiveness, and negativity about gay and lesbian peoples to yourself.

It's an ineresting question...

You can make the same observation about Batman and Robin - two men who were always at each others side, etc...
I don't think the Lone Ranger and Tonto were gay, though. For many years it was standard for the tv hero to have a sidekick, and 99.9% of the time it was another man.

My question was meant to be taken seriously and if taking my question seriously and giving it a thoughtful answer is something you cannot do, you're not required to respond. There are many gay and lesbian people viewing the boards at Sitcoms Online. Gay and lesbians have just as much right to view and enjoy Sitcoms Online as anyone else. And they have the right to view and enjoy the boards without being harassed about their orientations. Please keep your impatience, dismissiveness, and negativity about gay and lesbian peoples to yourself.

negativity, dismissiveness, and impatience about gays and lesbians? all i'm saying is WHO CARES if a TV character is gay. it's just a CHARACTER and that's how they are supposed to portray them. back then nobody thought of "omg people might think the Lone Ranger is gay." just sit back and enjoy the show instead of worrying who's gay and who isn't. i have a lot of tolerance for gay people because they are just like everyone else. but to go around judging who's gay and who isn't (which you're doing), that is just wrong.

Miss Landers stated that she's writing an article on this topic. Her post is very respectful, and she isn't judging anyone. You know, I'm sick and tired of everytime someone mentions the word "gay", they have a mob all over them. It seems to me that unless you're gay or an outspoken defender of gays, you can't use the word around here without being attacked.

I'm tired of all the lectures and sob stories about being persecuted as a gay person. Before anyone goes off on me, I've got nothing against gay people WHATSOEVER. They are no better or worse than other people.

I thought that gay people wanted to get to a time and place where they can be mentioned casually without a controversy. Miss Landers does not deserve to be accused of judging anyone. She simply brought up a topic. Nobody's bashing anyone. Toughen up.

Miss Landers stated that she's writing an article on this topic. Her post is very respectful, and she isn't judging anyone. You know, I'm sick and tired of everytime someone mentions the word "gay", they have a mob all over them. It seems to me that unless you're gay or an outspoken defender of gays, you can't use the word around here without being attacked.

I'm tired of all the lectures and sob stories about being persecuted as a gay person. Before anyone goes off on me, I've got nothing gay people WHATSOEVER. They are no better or worse than other people.

I thought that gay people wanted to get to a time and place where they can be mentioned casually without a controversy. Miss Landers does not deserve to be accused of judging anyone. She simply brought up a topic. Nobody's bashing anyone. Toughen up.

I agree Janice.

I saw nothing wrong with the question, it's an interesting question, so I gave my answer.

Miss Landers stated that she's writing an article on this topic. Her post is very respectful, and she isn't judging anyone. You know, I'm sick and tired of everytime someone mentions the word "gay", they have a mob all over them. It seems to me that unless you're gay or an outspoken defender of gays, you can't use the word around here without being attacked.

I'm tired of all the lectures and sob stories about being persecuted as a gay person. Before anyone goes off on me, I've got nothing gay people WHATSOEVER. They are no better or worse than other people.

I thought that gay people wanted to get to a time and place where they can be mentioned casually without a controversy. Miss Landers does not deserve to be accused of judging anyone. She simply brought up a topic. Nobody's bashing anyone. Toughen up.
Exactly what i'm thinking. There's nothing wrong with this thread. The "in the closet" thread on the music board is so damn ridiculous. they're bringing bullying and suicide into it. it's to post your opinions and theories, not to make fun of anyone for being gay. :rolleyes:

I had no idea we had any gays or lesbians - why don't you PM everyone the names.
That, however, would be a bit disrespectful.

Do you remember "The Lone Ranger" TV series starring Clayton Moore and....
Here's a comphrensive list of gay characters on televison that may be helpful for your article. There is a subtle reference to The Lone Ranger.

And Batman and Robin.

http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~wyatt/tv-characters.html#star

Miss Landers stated that she's writing an article on this topic. Her post is very respectful, and she isn't judging anyone. You know, I'm sick and tired of everytime someone mentions the word "gay", they have a mob all over them. It seems to me that unless you're gay or an outspoken defender of gays, you can't use the word around here without being attacked.

I'm tired of all the lectures and sob stories about being persecuted as a gay person. Before anyone goes off on me, I've got nothing gay people WHATSOEVER. They are no better or worse than other people.

I thought that gay people wanted to get to a time and place where they can be mentioned casually without a controversy. Miss Landers does not deserve to be accused of judging anyone. She simply brought up a topic. Nobody's bashing anyone. Toughen up.
You are in need of a reality check.

You are in need of a reality check.You are in need of a banning.

You are in need of a reality check.
she does if she wants to be living in your fantasy world.

You are in need of a banning.
You are in need of a banning aswell.

she does if she wants to be living in your fantasy world.
You are quite naive.

That's an interesting analysis. I do wonder though...on any tv show or movie, we (the audience) don't see everything. We have to assume that characters are doing other things in their lives that we're not seeing.

Is it possible that The Long Ranger and Tonto were seeing women, and it wasn't being shown to the audience?

Also, I wasn't aware that "situational homosexuality" was encouraged and practiced in the Old West. I'm guessing that situational homosexuality is, as the name implies, when a person is intimate with the same sex due to their circumstance, such as being in prison, etc. It's a whole other topic, but I think that not all straight men would engage in it under any circumstance. Could be wrong on that.

Interesting reading. :)

Situational homosexuality was practiced in the old West simply because females were few and far between. For ranch hands and cowboys, the nearest females (aside form the rancher's wife and daughters who were strictly off limits) could be as much as 50 miles away from the ranch. Much too far for the average ranch hand to ride into town every night for female companionship. So how do you think cowboys and ranch hands satisfied their physical urges and needs? If you answered "with each other" you are correct.


That sound you just heard was John Wayne spinning in his grave.

Seriously, it's a very interesting theory Miss Landers.

;)

I agree with Janice 100%. "Oh I'm gay, don't talk about us because that is offensive." Everybody is so damn uptight about the "gay" issue. Who gives a flying **** if you are or you aren't? I'll tell you one thing though, I'm not going to be put into a guilt trip if I decide to talk about it on the board. I swear sometimes this board has become a gay rights site. When did this happen? Next we won't be able to talk about anything related to African Americans, Jews, Christians, Italians, Asians, Native American Indians, Muslims, Car mechanics, jugglers, etc...

I agree with Janice 100%. "Oh I'm gay, don't talk about us because that is offensive." Everybody is so damn uptight about the "gay" issue. Who gives a flying **** if you are or you aren't? I'll tell you one thing though, I'm not going to be put into a guilt trip if I decide to talk about it on the board. I swear sometimes this board has become a gay rights site. When did this happen? Next we won't be able to talk about anything related to African Americans, Jews, Christians, Italians, Asians, Native American Indians, Muslims, Car mechanics, jugglers, etc...
Over compisation is not right, but neither is biased conversation about a generalized group.

I agree with Janice 100%. "Oh I'm gay, don't talk about us because that is offensive." Everybody is so damn uptight about the "gay" issue. Who gives a flying **** if you are or you aren't? I'll tell you one thing though, I'm not going to be put into a guilt trip if I decide to talk about it on the board. I swear sometimes this board has become a gay rights site. When did this happen? Next we won't be able to talk about anything related to African Americans, Jews, Christians, Italians, Asians, Native American Indians, Muslims, Car mechanics, jugglers, etc...
i agree. if you think homosexuality shouldn't be thought of as different from other sexualities, stop singling out posts that contain the word "gay" without saying anything extraordinarily positive about gay culture. you ARE reacting to it differently than you would if it were about heterosexuality.

That sound you just heard was John Wayne spinning in his grave.Forget the Duke. What about Clayton Moore. Alive he had to deal at one time with being banned from wearing the mask and now dead, he's got this slash writer on his character's ass.

That's an interesting analysis. I do wonder though...on any tv show or movie, we (the audience) don't see everything. We have to assume that characters are doing other things in their lives that we're not seeing. Is it possible that The Long Ranger and Tonto were seeing women, and it wasn't being shown to the audience?

Good question. Yes, we do have to assume that characters in TV shows are engaged in activities we don't see: they're eating three meals a day for instance, or getting a good night's sleep, or they're going to the doctor and the dentist. But I don't believe we can assume the Lone Ranger was seeing women for the simple reason that he apparently believed he needed to keep his identity secret. Assignations with women would have jeopardized the secret of his identity. And it's not likely The Lone Ranger would have patronized prostitutes - he had high ideals. (It's more likely The Lone Ranger would have attempted to reform them!)

Also, I wasn't aware that "situational homosexuality" was encouraged and practiced in the Old West. I'm guessing that situational homosexuality is, as the name implies, when a person is intimate with the same sex due to their circumstance, such as being in prison, etc. It's a whole other topic, but I think that not all straight men would engage in it under any circumstance. Could be wrong on that. Interesting reading. :)

I don't want you to believe that homosexual relations were encouraged or celebrated in the old West with trumpets, drums, fireworks, and parades. And I don't want you to think that every man engaged in homosexual relations. The old West was not an endless homosexual Saturnalia. No, indeed not. But homosexual relations were not suppressed nor censured with quite the rigorous measures and social disapprobation found in other times and places. The strictures of church, society, and social institutions simply didn't exist on the frontier. A man was free to pursue homosexual relations - whether those relations were "quickies" or long term spiritual, emotional, and physical bondings - without the censure of the community or community institutions. Homosexual relations were encouraged or condoned by trail bosses simply to keep the peace and to get the job at hand done quickly and with as little problems as possible. Cattle drives were sometimes as long as three months through difficult, lonely, dangerous, and wild terrain; it was not to the trail boss's interest to have two dozen illiterate, crude cowboys on a long drive sexually frustrated from one moment to the next any more than it would be of any benefit to have them underfed, underpaid, or overworked. Homosexual relations in the old West were not unusual - indeed, it might not be "stretching it" to say that at some times and in some places way out West, homosexual relations were the norm. Today's notion that lusty young cowboys joyously bedded beautifully manicured and groomed saloon girls night after night is far - very far - from the realities of the old West.

I agree, every thread that mentions homosexuality doesn't have to be examined and autopsied by overly sensitive people.

True acceptance means people should be able to discuss it without others freaking out that we're all set to bash them or homosexuality in general.

Lets face it - when it comes down to it - they're just imaginary characters we're talking about here - get a grip!!!

HOW DARE YOU? :mad: First off all the series debuted in 1949. At that time kids would go EEEEWWW if any cowboy kissed, hugged, or even showed any special kind of intrest in a girl. It was all innocent, they were too busy fighting the bad guys to think about romance. Roy Rogers once said kids would get mad even he looked like he was going to Kiss Dale (EEEEEEEEWWW) Trigger :crazy: was okay but not Dale (And lets not go there ;)

Wasn't there just a whole, long other thread about this very subject??

Deja vu or what?!